Re: Feature request: client would like to donate X thousand dollars for development of features Y and Z.
От | The Hermit Hacker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Feature request: client would like to donate X thousand dollars for development of features Y and Z. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.BSF.4.21.0009181337360.17831-100000@thelab.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Feature request: client would like to donate X thousand dollars for development of features Y and Z. ("Dan Browning" <danb@cyclonecomputers.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
PgSQL, Inc just recently announced that they were working on this ... I haven't heard of anyone else, but that doesn't mean nobody else is ... On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Dan Browning wrote: > I'm developing a db-driven web site for a client. > So far the solution happens to use a lot of open sources software (best tool > for the job). > > But when looking at areas of high-availability and performance in relation > to our database back-end, I'm trying to find a solution that will fit the > clients need (say, 4 "nines" of reliability or so). The application the db > server is running is mostly SELECTs, but a fair share of inserts > (interchange e-commerce is the application). The open source > performance/reliability solution I came up with: > > - master database server (high end box) is read/write. > - primary slave database server (high end box) is read-only, and gets it's > data by means of replication from master database server. This box is > specially marked to take over for the master in the event that the master > fails (hot failover). > - many slave database servers (low end boxes) are read-only. These get > their data from the primary slave database server, instead of the master > database server, so that the master only has to replicate once (and then, > only to one machine: the primary slave db server). > > What do you guys think of my solution? It's more complicated than Oracle's > parallel clustering, etc. But Oracle costs $30,000 (for our install, > anyway). So I would like to implement the above on open source software. > > But, I've read that postgresql replication code is not yet in "usable" > status. MySQL on the other hand claims their replication has "alpha" code > quality, but that many customers use it successfully on a day-to-day basis > (that was the feeling I got, anyway). And neither pgsql or mysql have > claimed any hot failover abilities. So my questions are twofold: > > 1) What is the status of the features I described? (replication, seamless > failover). > > 2) My client is able to "donate" several thousand dollars to the development > of said features (heck, I might kick in a few bucks). What are our options > for this? Anyone willing to step up to the plate and say, "yes, I'll do it > on a contract for 10k!". Or is there already an established way of getting > X feature for Y dollars? > > 3) Or, should I just bite the bullet and use Mysql? (minus foreign keys, > minus transactions, minus ....) > > Thanks, > > Dan Browning > Network & Database Administrator > Cyclone Computer Systems > Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy Systems Administrator @ hub.org primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: